Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4 (some duplicates have been removed)
of the debate. in 1988, michael dukakis could have had help not looking so cold in his response. >> we have a professor at the george washington university, john sides. when you have those moments that reinforce, either good or for ill, to a candidate, how important or damaging can these be? >> candidate debates in a general election to not move the polls a lot. only in a close race. in general, i think these dramatic moments in debates are not necessarily game changes for the average american voter. >> you wrote, usually the candidates fight to a draw. it is hard in that context to have a stunning victory or a terrible defeat. can you elaborate? >> the candidates spend a lot of time trying to lower their expectations about the performance and portray the other person as this great orator. in reality, the candidates spend a lot of time prepping for the debates and they are very good at it. they have read a lot of material and memorize a lot of material. in that context, it is hard for a candidate to really make a big enough mistake to actually swing opinion too strongly to his opponent. >>
. >> will go to a question from the audience and then go back to twitter. >> michael hogan said he felt -- many of us watch c-span for hours at a time. and cnn, proven by the audience here, do not you think it would be fascinating to say to each candidate -- say what is on your mind. tell us something about yourself for an hour and a half. or an hour. would not get a better insight into the candidates, to just let them talk like that. >> it would draw a small audience. whether 80 million people would sit there for 3 hours -- i would certainly like to see more interactive exchange. we should push the format in that direction. i do not recall who it was, we ought to push the people into a room with a typewriter and see what comes out after four hours. there's certainly an audience for a more deep, intellectual discussion. but, with a sore important about these debates -- there are so many people that watch the debate -- low-interest people that watched the debate. those are the people that would not watch that. >> from twitter -- and maybe you answer this with a little bit of a personal response
,000 jobs in this country. in new jersey, do you know how many? 20,000. michael just talked about the new jersey unemployment rate. we have got hundreds of thousands of people out of work now. do we really want to raise taxes on people now? and of more people out of work? and get rid of reductions and exemptions that john patapsco and. simplify things. >> a question for joe kyrillos. >> congress did away with earmarks. officially. no one has ever wanted them unless they come back to their home district. how would you bring back dollars to new jersey in this environment. and what would you identify as the most pressing new jersey project in need of fiscal funding? >> unfortunately, these guys abuse be earmarked process. there were excessive. and of course now we are at a point with our debt problems that we cannot afford them. so i am going to fight tooth and nail -- within the confines of form and other plans that exist for people to compete. and i am going be very active around the state. we lost a big army base. people all around new jersey. sure where you were in that fight. i did not
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4 (some duplicates have been removed)